Last Friday, a Northern District of California magistrate judge foreclosed all age-related discrimination claims lodged by a former Amazon warehouse worker against the e-commerce titan.
The four-page opinion dismissed the case mostly without prejudice, finding the allegations impermissibly vague, untimely, or that the plaintiff lacked standing to bring them.
The opinion recounted that the woman filed suit in December 2021 on behalf of herself and a putative class of California Amazon warehouse workers over age 40, alleging that the e-commerce company has a policy or practice inflicting an unlawful disparate impact on older employees. Amazon removed the case to federal court in January.
Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley analyzed the plausibility of the California law discrimination claims, starting with disparate impact. The court concluded that the complaint leveled too generalized a challenge to Amazon’s policy of “rate of production and/or work production quotas.”
“The complaint’s reader is left with the impression that the complaint drafter does not even know what is being challenged,” the opinion said. Further, the court brushed off “bald” allegations that the plaintiff and other older employees suffered transfers, demotions, adverse schedules, and terminations at higher rates than younger workers.
Related California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) claims failed for the same reason, as did the plaintiff’s California Unfair Competition Law claim. “Plaintiff has also not sufficiently alleged her standing to pursue such a claim since only equitable relief, not damages, are recoverable,” the court added.
In granting leave to amend all but the plaintiff’s injunctive relief claim and cause of action involving employment outside the statute of limitations, the court cautioned the plaintiff and her counsel to adhere to Rule 11 pleading strictures.
The plaintiff is represented by the Law Office of Eric Honig and the Law Offices of Peter M. Hart. Amazon is represented by Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.
